Why Myspace 2 Should Be Done
I just got done reading this thread over on Digg about someone who did a Myspace homepage redesign and although it is better than the current version, many of the commentors agree that there really is no point since Myspace will not change. Let me rephrase that by saying Myspace can not change. Myspace is stuck in the position they are now and it would take some mighty fine programming to get people to move to a new form of layouts and code without breaking the millions of disgusting ready-made templates already available. But I got to thinking and what if they just simply created another Myspace?
They have all the data they need in their databases, so why not just create a whole new site on another domain? You can start fresh and scale as you wish with new features while also slowly moving your current userbase over to the new site. Many people believe that over time when a person gets tired of Myspace that they will simply go on to the next best thing. Why can’t that next best thing be done by Myspace?
Maybe I am being feeble-minded here, but I can’t help but draw comparisons to how games work. Every once in a while a great game comes along and a strong community builds up around it. Maybe the community is focused around modifications (mods) of the game and continue to make it exciting for each other as time goes on. However, there comes a point where you can only take a game so far and by this time the game publisher is usually already hard at work creating the next version.
There is a chance you will alienate a small population of your audience with the new game, but you have a greater chance of bringing even more people on board. People like new versions, with the exception of movies. Hell, I was even going to suggest Myspace2.com as the domain, but that is uglier than Myspace 1. In any case, am I thinking crazy here and why don’t we see this done more often outside of video games? Isn’t there a time where you just can’t add anymore to your website and you need to start from a fresh perspective?
When it comes to social networking sites, the biggest features aren’t what the site can do, but who is using the site and Myspace has that feature on lock.
Related reading:
I consider Virb to be the MySpace 2. It’s what myspace should have been originally, but never could.
By Dimitry on January 29, 2007 11:33 am
I think it is hard to consider Virb (which I am a part of) Myspace 2 considering the lack of people and interaction that occurs on the site. It is pretty though.
By Scrivs on January 29, 2007 11:53 am
Why should MySpace redo anything why they are pleasing their target audience? They made a site, plain looking, a challenge to customize. Then their users made templates - lots of templates - that are very easy to install. Their users install these templates and they tweak it, add media to it, and wear their pages like a badge. Because they are proud of the outcome. It’s a close representation of who they are. Then they add their words to it. Then their friends come and add more stuff that doesn’t match to the site so it’s so busy the brain doesn’t know what is more offensive - the visual or the sound from the music the person picked that you can’t stand.
But to them, it’s home. To them, they log on every day, check their messages, upload pictures and videos, and think how they can make that page look even better by (to us) making it look worse.
Most of their users are happy with the way things are. A small amount don’t and when I say small even if it’s 1 million people that’s small by their total number of users. Why piss off their target audience when their target audience is happy?
By Tyme White on January 29, 2007 1:53 pm
Because they won’t be around forever. Working on the next version now doesn’t mean releasing it now and because of that you can even put a small team to task. When they look at their stats to see if people are leaving or not they can set the time when the new stuff would launch.
And don’t think MySpace is pleasing their target audience. Their target audience is pleasing themselves (kinky) because their friends are on there. If their friends were somewhere else and it was better than Myspace they would go there as well. It all matters when the trendsetters leave.
By Scrivs on January 29, 2007 2:00 pm
Who the hell cares about the Myspace home page??? I can’t even tell you what it looks like and I’ve got a Myspace and use it nearly every day (only because my wife and friends are using it, but I use it nonetheless). I’m sick of all the carping about Myspace being ‘ugly’. ‘Myspace’ is not ugly; individual user sites can be ugly, but damn it , they are that way because the user likes them like that.
By Graham on January 29, 2007 2:04 pm
i say update, before it’s too late to say they were too late about being too late…that place is horrid under the hood
By blinking8s on January 29, 2007 2:19 pm
I think that’s actually a good idea. I mean, it sounds crazy when you first read it, but considering all the MySpace layouts and widgets that depend on MySpace’s structure, it may actually be a move worth thinking about. My company does design services, and one of our services is designing MySpace layouts for record labels and artists (maybe I’ll post em’ in 9r sometime). If a change is made to the layout structure, our designs could break. So, it’s a major concern to us.
We’ve noticed a couple small changes on MySpace profiles in the last couple months, but nothing that interferes with the structure. They’ve changed the header with the search (also later added the Google logo on the side of it) and redesigned the contact table icons, but not much else. Changing the profiles structure just means more work for everyone. Not only would MySpace have to program in the new profiles, they’d have to redesign all of their major corp clients with special MySpace profiles as well as here from all the record labels and corporations whose layouts have broke.
By Brian Benzinger on January 29, 2007 2:33 pm
No MySpace won’t be around forever. The reason why? Because something better than MySpace comes along (it always does). Their design issues would be the least of their problems.
By Tyme White on January 29, 2007 3:16 pm
Brian: That’s exactly what I am talking about. It’s not a simple case of just replacing some code for another because now you have millions of customized layouts and you don’t know what you will be breaking. People associated “freedom” of layouts and Myspace as a good thing, but in the end it can end up hurting them.
Tyme: That just further proves my point. Why can’t the next best thing be Myspace 2? When Half-Life was released on the PC it was the best FPS for a very long time and with mods stayed that way and the next FPS to best it? Half-Life 2.
By Scrivs on January 29, 2007 3:23 pm
You are comparing a continuously changing environment to a game and that’s like comparing apples and horses. People accept sequels but more often sequels disappoint than please the audience. When it’s MySpace’s time it will plateau so the next big thing can come in.
What’s ironic is that I used to be one of the MySpace type people accept it was called AOL. I had a page that I cringe at now, but I thought was hot at the time. I had my friends, a large following. Then AOL changed their URL structure. Many went elsewhere. My page was abandoned because I couldn’t update the site without morphing into the new structure - losing my crowd. MySpace would end up facing the same thing unless they magically fixed everything and allowed everything to be imported over. Then it’s just MySpace all over again, isn’t it?
By Tyme White on January 29, 2007 4:22 pm
To me I see the same thing. Exactly how is Myspace a continuously changing environment with the exception of adding some minor features here and there and more people joining up? If you want to switch it up lets go from Half-Life to WoW. You don’t think more people would go to WoW 2 over something else?
For your AOL example, again you are just proving why I am saying Myspace 2 should be done. AOL tried to change the structure and lost everything and same will happen to Myspace. Instead make a better Myspace on Myspace 2, tell people about it and it has a better chance of getting people than a new startup does any time.
By Scrivs on January 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Make people kick ass. With crappy default templates, it’s easy for users to create better ones. And kicking ass. For those of us that understand that simple principle, the future is bright.
By Per on January 29, 2007 5:20 pm
Why couldn’t they do Myspace 2 as a beta? As long as they can make it so someone can move over their friends or even keep both accounts to start with. I know that if they were using Myspace 2 then they would still want to be able to communicate with Myspace 1 in the same way they have been.
I say as long as it is backwards compatible for common functions, then the ability to contrast the new functions with the old will make the new site blossom as long as they are better features. Best of both worlds.
The users are happy but can always be happier.
By Ellsworth on January 29, 2007 6:07 pm
Let’s take your Half-Life to WoW example. Replace it with Asherson’s Call 1 and 2. AC1 is still being played today. AC2 with better graphics, more features failed. Why? Because people were happy with AC1.
Enter MySpace. The people (like you) that think it should be redone because it’s ugly and clunky aren’t their target audience. MySpace is continuously changing because their members are constantly adding/removing content from their sites. You’re saying MySpace can’t change where it is so set up another area (and the costs associated with it) for the next version. This is the exact reason why MySpace should die and something else takes their place.
Because they didn’t have enough foresight to make a system that could expand and be upgraded with features (without mass problems) to remain competitive. That’s the problem with a lot of companies - they don’t have a thorough business plan.
By Tyme White on January 29, 2007 8:21 pm
[...] Why Myspace 2 Should Be Done I agree that when something becomes an ugly mess like MySpace the best thing is to start over. But that’s all the more reason to let it die. (tags: myspace) [...]
By links for 2007-01-30 at Baron VC on January 29, 2007 8:49 pm
I don’t see how they’ve locked themselves into their current situation, it’s just like with Apple’s transition to Intel processors. Continue producing Mac applications that can run on both PowerPC and Intel platforms while nudging new Apple buyers to invest in the new processor to aid its adoption. MySpace could work on “v2.0″ and add a whole lot of new features, and just tell people that these new features only work if you change your profile over to the new template style. Want to keep your old profile? That’s no problem, we built-in a translator that lets your old profiles work on the new system, albeit without the brand new features.
They have enough employees that they could section off a small team to work on “v2.0″ while MySpace popularity is riding high, but if it ever falls off like Friendster did (or the countless others) then they could flip the extra team into high gear and prepare that 2.0 version for launch. It’s a win-win scenario - current users get to keep their profiles with no updating, and then if you want to update then MySpace will provide translation tools for the new template engine and then you get access to the new features.
By Mike Rundle on January 30, 2007 3:21 am
Good idea Scrivs, you just create a beta site on another set of servers and allow people to move their accounts over. Or it could even be like when Livejournal moved to their new styling system… people had the option of switching to S2 and redesigning their Journals with pre-made styles. MySpace users like to screw around with their layouts every so often so there’s no reason why they wouldn’t want to move to a new system and do things over again.
By Montoya on January 31, 2007 10:37 am
The problem with myspace is that the way it’s designed, it’s very difficult to create good code for. Design shouldn’t be a challenge, and users would highly embrace an easier (hopefully, standards upholding) design system. I know I would switch in a heartbeat.
By Ben on February 10, 2007 9:29 pm
MySpace will not significantly lose visitors because of it’s horrid layout, and will not gain visitors by improving it. The whole “wait until they start to fade, then upgrade!” thing doesn’t fly to me.
The value is in the people and the social interaction.
By Kevin on February 12, 2007 11:53 pm
(to clarify)
I think upgrading in parallel now, as a service to anyone interested, would be great: http://beta.myspace.com
By Kevin on February 12, 2007 11:56 pm
[...] Original post by Scrivs [...]
By mourning » Why Myspace 2 Should Be Done on March 6, 2007 6:16 pm
Myspace 2 has to be done b/c we teenagers cant always live off the old myspace, we need a new myspace…
By Billy on March 10, 2007 4:45 am
Umm virb.com sucks. I been invited and they are trying to claim they are better when cleary there not. Sorry but Virb has nothing really special there. Myspace has more features but won’t argue it isn’t the best it could be. Myspace is ok, just needs more protection features, a better look and coding.
By Socialviewer on March 12, 2007 12:24 am